This is government they are talking about using your tax money to force you to use non free software. The report has 17% of tender notices containing brand names and trademarks instead of real specifications. Practices vary by country but Microsoft get’s the lions share of the corruption, mentioned in more than half of notices that use trademarks. The study admits to under reporting and the impact of this goes far beyond 17% by network effect. When the government only accepts Microsoft junk, it forces regulated industry to use the same. This kind of subversion is how Microsoft became a monopoly. It’s good to see the proportion of tainted tenders is down slightly, but sane government would only use free software in the first place.

This is corruption. It is corruption because there is no equal opportunity, just the blind handover of taxpayers’ money (or money derived from the public through national debt) to corrupt, ultra-wealthy executives at Microsoft, which we know uses bribery to get governments to sign deals. It’s not just about fair competition anymore; a lot of the time it’s about holding criminals accountable (on both sides, the giving and the receiving). We previously covered a lot more evidence and stories which are relevant to this. Open Forum Europe (OFE) adds fuel to the fire, which isn’t just smoke anymore. █

Share this post:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Staff of the EPO is given yet more reasons to protest tomorrow at the British Consulate, for the so-called 'President' of the EPO reminds everyone of the very raison d'être for the protest -- a vain disregard for the rule of law

The European Patent Office (EPO) President, Benoît Battistelli, reportedly started threatening -- as before -- staff that decides to exercise the right to assemble and protest against abuses, including the abuses of President Battistelli himself

A protest in Munich in less than 6 days will target Mr. Sean Dennehey, who has helped Battistelli cover up his abuses and crush legitimate critics, whom he deemed illegal opposition as if the EPO is an authoritarian regime as opposed to a public service which taxpayers are reluctantly (but forcibly) funding